So the first attachment is from what the previous tutor completed. The first, second, third, and fourth attachments are the instructions for completing the lab, which includes any questions that need answering. APA format is required, although there is no
Michelle_Michy
20180628220157origins_of_the_cosmos_lab31.docxRunning Head: THE ORIGINS OF LIFE 1
THE ORIGINS OF LIFE 2
The Origins of Life
Name
Course
Tutor
Date
PART 1
Young Earth Creationist
The research article makes it clear that indeed, contrary to evolutionists' beliefs, the Bible goes well along the same line with research conducted by the new genetic researchers. This makes a lot of sense compared to what evolutionists have been insinuating is the basis of their research. The article characterizes scientists as being people guided by Scripture and being able to prove that Scripture is indeed accurate with regard to animals and humans being of the same age. They have also been characterized as telling the truth from the beginning. The article touches on the fact that the research matches up with Scripture's creation story about 6000 years ago with both cases bringing to light the same age of the animals and humans. If I had been working on the idea and it is proven right, I would be elated enough to share the findings with the world. The research ideas addressed in the article are about animals and humans coming into existence at around the same time as opposed to the research conducted by evolutionists. The target audience of the article is Christian audience and evolutionists. If I were not a Christian, I would probably need further proof against the evolutionist theory (https://answersingenesis.org).
Progressive creationism
The first reaction towards this article is that this is new information and it is an eye-opener to things not previously perceived. The article characterizes scientists as bringing to light that which has been written in Scripture as confirmation of the creation story. The article talks about Scripture as being the inspired Word of God since it marries well with the scientific view of the haze that was in existence 580 million years ago. If I had been working on this idea, I would be happy to publish my work following confirmation of my work through Scripture which could only mean that it is true. The research idea being addressed has to do with the existence of a haze in the atmosphere which then paved the way for light or transparency as indicated in the Bible. The target audience of the article is the people of the world as confirmation for the working of God in creation. If I were not Christian, I would slightly believe this idea and be a step closer to believing in God (http://reasons.org/).
Evolutionary creation
The reaction towards this article is that it makes sense when it comes to proving the existence or lack of the multiverse. The article characterizes scientists are curious people who are after finding answers to things they see and would like to understand how they came into being. The article says that it is essential to consider, whether in the absence or presence of the multiverse, the presence of God and Him being the Creator of all creation. If this was my idea, I would be glad about the characterization of the work given that it gives way for confirmation of the existence or lack of the existence of the multiverse. The idea being addressed in this article is that a Christian should not be quick to tell away an atheist's thoughts, but even if they know it is wrong, they should seek to provide proof for this. The target audience is the Christian who is quick to refute an atheist's thoughts as well as to an atheist to help them understand the Biblical view. If I was not a Christian, I would applaud the writer of the article for giving a fair chance to both the Christian and atheist (biologos.org/blogs).
PART 2
The characterization of Christians and origin of life, in this case, is inaccurate. It is inaccurate because the creationists already know that there will not be life found elsewhere and creation of life in the laboratory may occur but will not be, in its entirety, consistent with the creation of our Creator. They also know that the earth's focus is a divine creation for the Creator Himself and that life is definitely a miracle as a result of the power of the Creator to give life. The article on the multiverses has characterization that is consistent with the characterization in this article. Both articles have the view that it is either God or the universe, doing away with the existence of God ultimately.
PART 3
Article 1
This article does not identify with a Creator and lacks a basis as to the origin of primal life from amyloids. The article characterizes scientists as being the brains behind the entire basis of evolution through amyloids. If this was my idea, I would view it as being characterized as falling short of research expectations since the source of the amyloids has not been given and the research is incomplete. The target audience is evolutionary scientists as a way to sow the progress made in the discovery of the origin of life. If I was not a Christian, I would view this article as having lose ends since the source of amyloids has not been given (https://phys.org).
Article 2
The first reaction of this article is that it does not make sense having living things come from non-living things like the scientist insinuates. The article characterizes science as being the one behind the creation and the spark that started creation. If I was the one behind the idea, I would be disappointed at how the article focuses on iron-sulfur clusters as being behind creation as opposed to having God as the Creator of all things. The target audience of the article is the people who believe in evolutionary science. If I was not a Christian, I would probably be moved by the realization of the iron-sulfur clusters as the source of creation (www.sciencemag.org/).
Article 3
The first reaction is that the article already disqualifies the existence of a Creator and focuses on particles and energy as being the beginning of life. The article characterizes scientists as people able to identify the source of life away from the Creator Himself. If the article was my idea, I would view the characterization of the article as having a single focus on creation without a Creator. The target audience of the paper is the evolutionary scientists and Christian scientists to help them become curious. If I was not a Christian, I would view the article as making sense since energy and particles come together to bring life into existence (timesofisrael.com).
PART 4
In conclusion, it is clear that both Christian and scientific researchers are making great strides, but they all need to have in-depth research conducted upon. In the Christian research, there has been a great connection between research of creation in origin of life and the creation as explained in Scripture which shows that there is a Creator. With regard to scientific researchers, the research conducted so far has some loose ends since proof has not been provided to show the evolution of the source of life and the entire creation. The suggestions that would be given to the Christian scientists would be that it is essential to avoid refuting the atheistic point of view until research has been conducted on the failure of the atheistic point of view so that there is level ground. After all, all human beings are just curious creatures that are trying to understand the life and world around them for better understanding. It might be an excellent way to understand creation with the Creator in focus. The other suggestion is conducting ample research before releasing their research to the world so that they may have consistent and sensible answers to questions sent their way. The ongoing problem in science is posing a challenge to Christianity and the Creator, God, but only because Christians have been given the challenge to share the basis of their beliefs. It is an excellent opportunity to find answers on the works of the Creator through His power and might and get others to believe in the Almighty God as the only Supreme Being who is behind all creation.
References
http://www.timesofisrael.com/meet-the-orthodox-jewish-physicist-rethinking-the-origins-of-life/
https://phys.org/news/2016-09-protein-like-primordial-soup.html
https://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com/2016/09/12/does-this-explain-the-origin-of-life/
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/07/how-sunlight-might-have-jump-started-life-earth
